Idealism, Realism & Liberalism

• The world in which we live is divided into nation states. All men, women and children inhabit some state or the other.
• No state lives in isolation. All states interact with each other.
• The interaction amongst the states has been occurring since ancient times and certainly got transformed in the modern, globalized age.
• When the states interact, these interactions affect the domestic populations of these states.
• When all the states in the world interact, it creates an international state system.
• The interaction that happens amongst the state in the international state system creates historical, political and socio-economic consequences for the domestic populations.
• International Relations is the study of all these interactions and the subsequent consequences.

Idealism

• Idealism stands for improving the course of international relations by Welfare of humanity & World, eliminating war, hunger, inequality, tyranny, force, suppression and violence from international relations.
• To remove these evils is the objective before humankind.
• Idealism accepts the possibility of creating a world free from these evils by depending upon reason, science and education. “Political idealism in international relations represents a set of ideas which together oppose war and advocate the reform of international community through dependence upon moral values and the development of international institutions and international law.”

Foundations of Idealism in International Relations

• States at the international level strive for peace and believe that peace can be achieved through cooperation.
• States do not prefer war as an outcome of conflict since war is perceived as harmful and irrational as a tool for conflict resolution.
• The reason of war is lack of understanding amongst states of each other’s interests.
• If each state is able to understand the interests of the other state and accommodate those interests in the interest of resolving conflicts amicably, then all states will be able to cooperate and maintain peace within the international system
• Idealism can be read as a policy prescription with faith in human reasoning and morality
• It tries and envisages a world which ought to be a better place in the future.
• It promotes a set of universal ethics with an intention to establish the idea of ‘one world’ with the global citizenry
• For the idealists, there is a firm belief that people will always cooperate to achieve harmony rather than opt for war or conflict.
• People have an ability to think, but they shall exercise their rational faculties only when states promote education.
• It prescribes that leaders of the states should promote education in the country since the more people are educated in a state, the more they shall exert control over their leaders so as to ensure peace.
• Thus, not only is education important, but public opinion in the decision making is also deemed to be paramount.
• They emphasised on democracy
• The public opinion is better informed if the public is provided access to education.
• The idealists are also of the view that international organisations play a very crucial role in global harmony and that is why they put a lot of emphasis on such bodies.

Realism

(Welfare of national interest, priority to national interest)

• The Realist Approach regards international politics as struggle for power among nations, and
• Justifies as natural the attempts of a nation to use national power for securing the goals of its national interest and national security
• Power is defined as a psychological relationship in which one actor is able to control the behaviour of another actor.
• A political actor is one who always seeks to secure one’s interests as defined in terms of power. Political realism further regards prudence as the guide in politics.

Foundation of Realism in International Relation

• In the world, we now have the existence of nation states. Each nation state intends to survive.
• The core national interest of a nation state is national security, which entails fighting for its survival.
• This survival is in a situation where others also intend to survive. Since each state has to survive on its own, the situation is of international anarchy.
• In an international system beset with anarchy, the state resorts to self-help.
• While self-help is undertaken, the state may expand its economic and military power.
• This will disturb the power equilibrium bringing the state into conflict with others.
• In this situation, war is inevitable. War is justified as it is fought for state survival which is also the national interest of the state.

Liberalism

Cooperative Liberalism

• They say that the evolution of the state is based upon a well-founded social contract between the individuals and the state itself.
• The state is composed of individuals. The individuals have capacity to think and the intentionality of that thought is aimed at cooperation with others.
• The state, as per the social contract, needs to ensure conditions for the growth of the individual. This is possible if one state cooperates with another state.
• If all the states cooperate for each other’s welfare, there will be peace.
• Thus, welfare of individuals deemed impossible if the states remain in a continuous state of warfare and instability.
• This interaction one state undertakes with other state will be based on mutual interest.

Institutional Liberalism

(Liberalism through Institution UNSC for international peace & security, UNFCCC for Climate Change)

• This interaction can also be facilitated by international organisations. International organisations are platforms for states to interact, these institution fosters cooperation amongst them.
• The main reason why a state may resort to interaction at an institutional level is that a state may fear non-compliance.
• Thus, it feels that intervention at an international institution will foster cooperation and the institutional mechanism may foster compliance
• The overall analysis of such interaction leading to cooperation on mutual interests will foster peace.

Sociological Liberalism

(Liberalism through Social Organisation [NGOs])

• This type of Liberalism says that the study of IR should not be restricted to just the study of the nation states and relations
• It takes a much broader view to assert that IR should be concerned with multiple actors like studies of different people, groups, civil society organisations, and so forth.
• Sociological Liberalism asserts that within a state, all these multiple actors also interact and cooperate.
• This emphasises the plural character of international dialogues and leads to integration
• As the interaction between the states will deepen, it will lead to interdependency of the states.
• As the states become interdependent, if a situation of conflict arises, the states will resolve them peacefully and would not opt for war as they would realise that mutual interest and welfare of the people is more important than the ensuing conflict to settle issues.
• As the states would modernise, the cooperation would increase and chances of war would decrease.
• Thus we can clearly articulate that broadly, the theory talks about globalism and the world order
• The world does witness global problems which could crop up in the shape of global warming, drug trafficking, black money, Terrorism and so on.
• These are problems which individual countries cannot solve.
• They require cooperation as states’ own resources are too limited to enable them to solve these problems on their own.
• The only solution for the states is to interact amongst themselves. As they interact and coordinate, they strive to establish a global consensus to cooperate and solve the problems.

Enlightenment & Self-Interest

• Both Idealism & Realism. Seems as idealism but deeply it is Realism.
• Ex:
1. India give free vaccine to Neighbours & Indian Ocean Country is Idealism & Realism is to prevent the country fall on china side.
2. India want to Bring democracy (Idealism & Realism) in Afghanistan.
• Democratic is Idealism & Realism is Taliban not to take over Afghanistan (If Taliban rule, they support Pakistan terrorist).

Arthashastra

• Kautilya’s Arthashastra as it is an Indian treatise on statecraft and diplomacy and also gives valuable insights into our international relations and foreign policy.
• Kautilya is India’s own realist as his ideas resonate with realism.
• Kautilya says, state, as an instrument, focuses on power enhancement in this context, the policy of the state should be to acquire power.
• The responsibility of the king is to guard his subjects and ensure their protection and survival.
• The core objective of the state is to acquire wealth, deliver justice and undertake expenditure
• This results in a conducive situation for wealth creation and leads to military expeditions for conquests.

Kautilya propounds that the power exuded by the state is of three types.

• Individual power - This is the power and courage of the king. This is psychological in nature. (charismatic personality, used at monarchy time)
• Hard power - This is the military and economic capacity of the ruler and the state.
• Soft power - This is the diplomatic power of the ruler.
• Kautilya says that before a ruler declares war on an enemy state, he should measure his power.
• The ruler, before the declaration of war, should ensure that he possesses superiority over all three levels.

Kautilya mentioned four Upayas

Sama, Dana or Dama, Danda and Bheda as ways to reach to a solution in state politics to avoid conflicts and war situations. This phrase is also commonly used when you need to find a solution to a problem anyhow.

1. Sama, the first step, means conciliation or alliances. When the situation of conflict arises between states, the firsts step is to talk.
2. Dana, the second, means gifts or compensation. Sometimes it is referred to as Dama, price, it means to pay the value.
3. Bheda, refers to usage of Logic or Trickery, influence the mind.
4. Dandarefers to force or armaments. To take up war with the opposite state.

Thirukkural

• He who can divide the enemy, bind friends more firmly and reunite estranged allies is indeed a minister. (633)
• Direct action is good whenever feasible, but when it is not, seek other means of success (673).